On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 17:20:33 +1300, James Pole <james at pole.net.nz> wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-11-03 at 08:27, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
>> The list of ports included in the gnome2 meta-port is not arbitrary.
>> It is
>> set by the GNOME release team. Therefore, I am hesitant to change the
>> meta-port. Sure, these configurable ports are still installed by
>> default,
>> but where does the customization end? I recommend you create your own
>> meta-port for gnome2, and stick it in /usr/ports/x11 (I use
>> gnome2-marcus).
>> Then, you can track that port, and add to it only the components you
>> want.
>> In general, you will only have to worry about updating it when major
>> GNOME
>> releases come out (twice a year).
>> Wouldn't it be better to just have gnome2 install everthing by deafult
> and include a WITHOUT_${SOMETHING} option for applications that not
> *everyone* is likely to use such as accessbily ooptions and certain
> other applications. This means that anyone can just set WITHOUT_ options
> in their /etc/make.conf -- which is a lot easier than making your own
> Makefile.
>> This idea seems to be a good comprimise from my point of view. Packages
> and lazy people will still be able to install the entire GNOME desktop
> from the default packages/ports while other people can just add a few
> lines to their /etc/make.conf to create their own custom desktop.
>> Any comments?
Well, I disagree because Gnome2 is meant to have those packages by
default. I call it feature. ;-)
Cheers,
Mezz
> - James
--
bsdforums.org 's moderator, mezz.